By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Hynad said:
Aeolus451 said:

People are rounding to make it seem better. The score is 6.9. That's in the 6s. It's below average.

You are rounding it down to make it seem worse than it is. And I really wonder why. What do you have to gain by doing this?

Now, since you're basing your claim based on the score it has on metacritics, do you even know what is considered average there?

Here:


Notice how it says "Mixed or average reviews based on 51 Critics"?


Yeah. It's an average score. Not a bad one. It may be bad by your own metrics (whatever they are), but it isn't so by the metacritic metrics.

The average as 5 is totally wrong as you don't have many games below 5 or a 5 game being considered average. A 5 is considered very very bad, while for forum goers 8 is more what is considered average to good, 7 is on the bad part as far as review go... besides that the user review is even lower.

Considering the game had 35 of its 51 reviews as mixed shows the game isn't on the good part of the spectrum as far as metacritic goes.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."